I play a lot of tennis, and I am primarily a S&V player with a big serve.

I am just saying that I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world to get rid of the second serve and eliminate all the servebots. Speed up the courts and single serves would still be a lot more effective than their current second serves. You would get a lot less aces / unreturnables but then it's more enjoyable to watch people win points with their ground games.

Yes, it would change the game substantially. But that is not necessarily always a bad thing.

Saying it would turn the ATP into the WTA is just silly talk. Do you really think that big servers is the only reason men's tennis is better than women's?

There's a whole tactical aspect in having two serves. A game with just one serve means a game where nobody risks ANY serve.

Genius is not replicable. Inspiration, though, is contagious, and multiform — and even just to see, close up, power and aggression made vulnerable to beauty is to feel inspired and (in a fleeting, mortal way) reconciled.

Hard courts are made of uniform rigid material, offering greater consistency of bounce than other outdoor surfaces.[8] Hard courts can vary in speed, although they are faster than clay but not as fast as grass courts. The quantity of sand added to the paint can greatly affect the rate at which the ball slows down.[9] Hard courts are generally more equalizing than clay or grass in terms of playing style, although they favor harder-hitting baseliners and all-court styles with the current equipment. The US Open is played on an acrylic hard court, while the Australian Open is played on a synthetic hard court. The main difference between a synthetic hard court and a true hard court surface is the level of hardness. When the ball bounces on this surface it is faster than all other surfaces if there is not much sand in the top paint. The amount of sand used in the top paint and the size of the sand also determines the speed – more sand means less speed and larger sand particles will slow the speed of play. The amount of friction can also be altered and more friction will produce a clay court effect, where topspin is magnified. The extra grip and friction will resist the sliding effect of the ball and the resistance will force the ball to change its rotation. Although hard courts are the least expensive to maintain, they are generally more rough on the human body than other surfaces due to their rigidity.[10]

Genius is not replicable. Inspiration, though, is contagious, and multiform — and even just to see, close up, power and aggression made vulnerable to beauty is to feel inspired and (in a fleeting, mortal way) reconciled.

The orgasmic reactions of the crowd (casuals) to points like that are a key reason they've slowed down everything.

BTW it's common knowledge that at the AO, Wimbledon and USO, the outside courts are quicker than the main stadium courts. Armstrong is a lot faster than Ashe at the US Open. There's a Big Four bias and it stinks.

this is key thing.

They do all this because of people who come to stadiums and buy tickets .

You can watch for example Wimbledon final between Sampras and Ivanisevic and atmosphere there was like in theater or opera.

Thats why they slowed surface to get more this kind of points and keep matches more entertaining.

It is difficult to watch as Novak runs down balls that would once have been good enough for winners and sends them back for winning lobs or passing shots. It is clear that being defensive and able to slide and run down balls on hard courts is more rewarded than great shotmaking and aggression. I thought slowing down the courts was partly to stop the dominance of big serves and first strike tennis on fast courts but it has gone too far the other way. Now the actual tennis skills with the racket are secondary to grinding athleticism.
And while the rallies are gasp worthy, they always were.

in many sports today defense is more important than offense and good attacking positions come from good defense at the first place.

Some of these sports are most popular one - basketball, football, handball, hockey, american football, rugby etc.

Simply the key thing in sport is - everybody wants to win and they try to figure out strategy and game plan to do it. If you rely only on offense you will loose in most of these sports, and finally they figured out that if you want to win for sure, defense is more important.

I understand that you dont like this in tennis - but thats the way it is.

I dont like either when Djokovic hit forehands and backhands which should be winners and Murray and Nadal get them back slowly with their moonballs or slicing but I need to live with it.